Secondary Students’ Thinking about Familiar Phenomena: Learners’ explanations from a curriculum context where ‘particles’ is a key idea for organising teaching and learning

Abstract

Particle models of matter are widely recognised as being of fundamental importance in many branches of modern science, and particle ideas are commonly introduced and developed in the secondary school curriculum. However, research undertaken in a range of national contexts has identified significant learning difficulties in this topic, and suggests that notions of particles that match scientific models are generally only attained over periods of some years. The implementation of a National Curriculum in Science in England was followed by increasingly prescriptive guidance to teachers. This culminated in a framework for teaching lower secondary science, which identified ‘particles’ as one of five key ideas for organising teaching and learning of science to all 11–14‐year‐olds. In this curriculum context, a basic particle model is introduced at the start of secondary education, and consolidated by being revisited in various contexts over three years. However, National Tests suggest that only a minority of pupils attain levels of understanding matching target knowledge. The present paper reports an interview study that explored how a sample of English secondary students explained phenomena commonly met in school science. It was found that students generally used the notion of particles, although most of their particle‐based explanations reflected alternative conceptions that have been reported in previous research. It is concluded that a curriculum strategy of early introduction and regular application during the early secondary years is not of itself sufficient to support the desired progression in thinking with particle models, and more sophisticated research‐informed pedagogy is needed.

Acknowledgements

Thanks are due to the University of Cambridge Faculty of Education and to Homerton College, Cambridge for offering the first author a study visit that allowed her to undertake the fieldwork. This visit was facilitated by CONACYT project grant 43918‐H. The authors are grateful to the teachers in the local schools who organised research visits and identified students prepared to be interviewed. Acknowledgement is also given to the valuable suggestions for improving the present paper offered by the anonymous referees.

Notes

1. Although the UK is considered one nation with a national government, there are variations in the education systems in the different constituent countries. In particular, Scotland has a completely different curriculum to the rest of the UK. This paper refers to the English context, and the ‘national’ curriculum and ‘national’ tests here signify England.

2. Under the ENC at the time of the study, students in state schools were expected to study mathematics, English, and science through the 11 years of compulsory schooling. The majority of upper secondary students followed a science course that is certified as equivalent to two subjects on leaving school (‘double science’). There was the provision for students of low achievement (or those with strong linguistic skills who wish to study several foreign languages) to follow a more restricted science curriculum during the final two years of compulsory schooling (‘single science’). Some students took biology, chemistry, and physics as separate examinations subjects (‘triple science’), where examination specifications also include additional topics not required by the mandated curriculum.

3. Retrieved January 14, 2008, from http://www.oup.com/uk/catalogue/?view=oxed&ci=9780199148967.

4. In quotations, ‘I’ represents the interviewer (A. G. F.).